“Amnesty” and its related “Guest Worker Program” are the Government and MSM solutions for what to do with the illegal aliens that are in this country.
It is worth noting that usually a “Guest Worker Program” is often nothing more than “amnesty” by another name and as detailed in the JOBS section, the “guest workers” are not just for picking lettuce.
Besides the fact that neither an “Amnesty” nor a “Guest Worker” program would correct any of the collateral damage from the dark aspects of illegal immigration that are detailed in this report, we all know that rewarding bad behavior only encourages more of it. This is just more common sense that the President and Congress seem to lack.
Unfortunately the problem of even recognizing there is a problem starts at the top as noted in White House compares illegal immigration to speeding. Is it any wonder that amnesty is proposed? And I’ll bet they are totally clueless to the amount of collateral damage being caused by speeding, drunk driving, illegal aliens.
In case you are not aware of it, Congress has passed 7 amnesties for illegal aliens starting with Reagan’s “one time” amnesty bill in 1986. By any measure, it can be concluded that all were The amnesty program that tried and failed with the end results being that we have a far greater illegal alien problem than before the amnesty programs!
As reported by Heather MacDonald in a recent article, Amnesty Lessons, Europe has found it out too. In any case, amnesty is very unfair to the hopeful millions who are on the waiting list, following the rules, and the many more millions who would like to come to the USA but who don’t happen to live near or have access to the porous southern border. In fact it could be argued that allowing amnesty for the illegal Hispanic aliens is discrimination against non-Hispanics who want to come too.
In discussing amnesty it is worth noting that when President Bush and most members of Congress, talk about “guest worker programs” they are basically talking about a “blanket amnesty” program – the same thing that was been done in the past, proven to be unworkable, and a great contributor to the existing problem. Nothing changes when they throw a piddling penalty payment into the mix.
How many government programs have you known of where the name is not actually representative of and often opposite to the real intent of the program?
In any case, why do the Government’s programs fail? Probably because they don’t really believe the problem is serious which results in not making the tough and politically incorrect decisions that would involve securing the border and denying sanctuary to illegal aliens. If not that then we start getting into more serious motivations such as they are all nothing more than career politicians pandering to whatever crowd that will get them re-elected and the good of the country be damned. That would actually be an improvement on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) motivations, a topic discussed a bit further down in this report, where they are basically selling out this country.
Regardless, as detailed in this report, the collateral damage being inflicted by our toleration of illegal immigration is very serious and is growing. More and more Americans are being ripped off, infected, molested, raped, killed, and murdered every day and basically little is being done about it.
As noted multiple times in this report, NOBODY is keeping track of the collateral damage inflicted on America by illegal aliens. Unfortunately, you can not rely on the MSM to report the facts and the government is basically lying about and/or concealing the problem.
When the government does look into the illegal immigration problem and doesn’t like what they find they ignore their own findings and keep the results from the American people. As an example, a Judicial Watch Special Report, U.S. Border Patrol Survey Analysis - Detailing the U.S. Government’s Polling of Apprehended Illegal Immigrants, on the Southern Border in January 2004, reports:
President Bush’s “temporary guest worker” proposal of January 7, 2004 was broadly interpreted as an illegal immigration amnesty program around the country and abroad. The Bush administration ordered the U.S. Border Patrol to survey apprehended illegal immigrants concerning President Bush’s proposal. The results indicated that President Bush’s proposal had actually lured greater numbers of illegal immigrants to violate the law. Politically inconvenient and/or potentially embarrassing data from the Border Patrol survey resulted in the Bush administration calling off the survey on January 27, 2004. The U.S. government never released a report based on the survey.
The White House directed Homeland Security Public Affairs Officers to deliberately withhold information from the public and the media about the Border Patrol survey and a related spike in illegal immigration. The Bush administration mislead Americans for political purposes. The White House approved talking points included:
· Do not talk about amnesty, increase in apprehensions, or give comparisons of past immigration reform proposals.
· Do not provide statistics on apprehension spikes or past amnesty data.
While the Border Patrol’s unscientific survey and its aborted execution may not provide a comprehensive picture of the relationship between President Bush’s immigration proposal and illegal immigration, the initial data is deeply disturbing. Analysis of the raw data from the survey forms indicates:
· 45% crossed illegally based on rumors of a Bush administration amnesty.
· 63% received Mexican government or media information supporting the notion of a Bush administration amnesty.
· 64% previously entered the United States illegally.
· 80% desired to apply for amnesty.
· 66% desired to petition for family members to join them in the U.S.
“President Bush’s proposed “temporary worker program” was broadly interpreted as an amnesty offer to illegal immigrants. A spike in illegal immigration following President Bush’s speech was surveyed as a priority intelligence requirement for a three-week period by the Border Patrol. Survey results were politically unfavorable to the Bush administration, who ordered the survey stopped. The White House directed public affairs officers to withhold information in order to mislead the public and stave off potential political embarrassment. The government only produced records material to the survey once Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit in federal court. The government continues to withhold additional records concerning this matter. Judicial Watch will continue to pursue this case and other illegal immigration matters, and report facts to the American people, as part of its mission as a public interest education foundation.”
While this paper will not attempt to analyze any proposed government “amnesty” or “guest worker” programs, keep in mind that the devil is in the details, and while Congress and the President talk, or don’t talk as the case may be, the illegal flow keeps gushing in.
The President’s solution is basically Senate Bill S.2611 which would grant blanket amnesty to all illegal aliens currently in the USA. The government and illegal alien friendly groups such as the Pew Hispanic Center say that is 10-12 million people. As this report details the number is probably double that amount and could be three times as high. Additionally, the bill would grant 1 million migrant workers green cards. To see the traitors, I mean Senators who voted for this sell out see S.2611.
Given all the associated costs detailed in this report, don’t you think a rational person would want to know how many illegal aliens they were granting amnesty to before they granted amnesty? Of course since they aren’t paying for it, I guess that isn’t important. At last once the illegal aliens who are molesting, raping, killing and murdering Americans are made into Americans the government can no longer be embarrassed by the fact that they are not counting the crimes being committed by foreign nationals on US soil. I suppose that is one way to take care of the problem: change all the illegal alien, foreign national criminals into resident American criminals.
The faucet is broken and water is squirting up like Old Faithful and our elected officials just look at each other and want to talk about how good the water running out the door is for the grass. It is time for the nation to rise up and say “Turn the water off and clean up the mess!”
When you hear the President and Congress talking about solving the “problem” with the President’s “guest worker” program, i.e. MORE GUEST WORKERS, ask yourself, and Congress, how that will stop illegal aliens from coming across the border?
How will more guest workers fix the problem of a very high percentage of even the existing guest workers not leaving when their current temporary work visas expire?
How will more guest workers reduce the unacceptable numbers of Americans that are currently being molested, raped, killed, and murdered by guest workers?
How will a larger guest worker program stop terrorist sneaking across the border who want to murder as many American school children as they can?
How will a bigger guest worker program prevent terrorist from smuggling a nuke across the porous southern border?
Remember, as it is now, the government does not even track crimes by foreign nationals, i.e. illegal aliens, or guest workers. More illegal alien criminals becoming “guest workers” will only result in the unintended consequences of more collateral damage – something we already have too much of.
As recently noted by Congressman King in a Washington Post article, The attrition solution:
“I emphatically disagree with statements Sen. Mel Martinez made recently to the Washington Times ("New RNC chief backs bill with guest-worker plan" Page 1, Feb. 2). Mr. Martinez wants to grant illegal aliens a "path to citizenship." This represents nothing less than endorsement of a mass amnesty for many millions of illegal aliens. Americans reject mass amnesty by large margins. Amnesty is an affront to native-born Americans, to legal immigrants, and to the very concept of the rule of law.
Amnesty can be dressed up as "earned legalization," "going to the back of the line" or a "path to citizenship," but it is still amnesty. Do we give bank robbers "earned plunder" or make them "go to the end of the line" to get their pillage or a "path towards keeping their prize"? Consider two brothers living in Mexico City. One came to the United States illegally. The other stayed in Mexico and supports his family there. Mr. Martinez would grant the brother who broke our laws permanent residence and then citizenship in our country. He would grant no such prizes to the brother who stayed in Mexico. This is the worst kind of amnesty -- it grants huge benefits that are reserved only for those who have broken our laws.
Amnesty will not, as advertised, increase national security; it will imperil us all. Some argue that if we grant amnesty we will at least know "who is in our country." They are fundamentally mistaken. We will not learn who the illegal immigrants are, but who they want us to believe they are. Aliens who want to create false identities will provide counterfeit or fraudulent documents from their "home country" and we will catch only those unlucky few whose can't afford quality fakes or who have fingerprints in the FBI system. There was a massive number of fraudulent applications filed for the 1986 amnesty. An estimated two-thirds of the applications for amnesty for agricultural workers were fraudulent and most of those fraudulent applications were approved.
As retired INS investigator Mike Cutler has testified before the Immigration, Border Security and Claims Subcommittee, "it will be a simple matter for illegal aliens, including terrorists or criminals, to walk into an immigration office, along with millions of other illegal aliens, and produce a false name and then get an official identity document from our government bureaucrats. These documents would then enable them to circumvent the various no-fly and terror watch lists. They would be able to use these documents as breeder documents – all the while staying under the radar and obscuring and concealing their true identity."
Mahmud Abouhalima, a leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was legalized under the 1986 amnesty. It was only after he got his amnesty that he was able to travel outside of the country, including several trips to the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, where he received the terrorist training he used in the bombing. Three-quarters of Americans have little or no confidence in the government's ability to weed out terrorists and criminals from the millions who would apply for amnesty.
Mr. Martinez presents the false choice of mass amnesty or mass deportations. The sensible middle ground -- supported by Americans over amnesty by more than two to one -- is a policy of attrition. Vigorous enforcement of our current immigration laws will substantially decrease the illegal-immigrant population over time. Experience has proven that illegal immigrants who could no longer easily obtain jobs would simply return to their home countries. The Center for Immigration Studies has concluded that a policy of vigorous enforcement would cut the illegal immigrant population in half in just five years.”
If you want to find out the real scoop about the government’s “amnesty” and “guest worker” programs contact the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
Regardless, it is time for the voters to ask the politicians proposing amnesty and expanded guest worker programs:
In granting amnesty, exactly how many Americans are YOU are willing to allow to be infected, molested, raped, killed, and murdered by illegal aliens to save ten cents on a head of lettuce?
In doing this report, I came across and learned about all sorts of things that I was never aware of.
Two are the North American Union (NAU) and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
Never heard of them? Neither had I until I started this paper.
After doing some research on it, I believe they are important enough to mention. I didn’t really have a place to put it but since they very well could be the darkest aspect of illegal immigration and are basically the mother of all amnesty programs I put this section here.
Note that most in the Govt, and MSM, and even many in the alternative media, dismiss the existence of both or, when they do acknowledge them, they refer to them as “study groups” for one thing or another. While it sounds like “Black helicopter” and “conspiracy theory” stuff, the axiom of “Where there is smoke there is fire” usually has an element of truth. Having spent a number of hours following various facets and seemingly unrelated and benign aspects and then connecting the dots, I fear that the NAU and SPP are a gathering storm and could ultimately end up causing far more damage than illegal immigration.
In fact the NAU and SPP, or the spirit behind them, may be the reason behind why so little is being done about illegal immigration.
The following are a few salient comments about the NAU and SPP. If you are a worker for a US manufacturer, a longshoreman or a truck driver you might want to pay real close attention. As often the case, the devil is in the details:
The first thing to establish is that the movements are real. For that see Judicial Watch Releases Pentagon Records from “North American Forum” Meetings - Defense Secretary, Senior Military and Staff Met with Mexican & Canadian Officials over “Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment” which notes:
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released documents obtained November 2006 under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) from U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM). The documents concern the participation of NORTHCOM Commander, Admiral Timothy Keating, NORTHCOM Political Advisor Deborah Bolton, and Plans, Policy & Strategy Director Major General Mark Volcheff in a meeting of the “North American Forum” at the Banff Springs Hotel in Banff, Canada on September 12-14, 2006. A similar request for records concerning forum participation by then-Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his entourage is still pending with the Pentagon.
The records include: 1) Proposed comments for Admiral Keating’s speech to the North American Forum; 2) Presentation outlines with handwritten marginal notes and comments from Ms. Bolton; 3) Policy papers; 4) Biographic sketches of participants; and, 5) Notes from Major General Volcheff.
The North American Forum presentations discussed immigration and border enforcement; full economic and energy integration including infrastructure and transportation; a North American investment fund; and common customs and duties. The idea of a carbon tax was raised as a means to combat so-called global warming. References to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) occur throughout the documents.
The notes for the presentations document the need to overcome popular opposition to North American integration: “To what degree does a concept of North America help/hinder solving problems between the three countries?…While a vision is appealing working on the infrastructure might yield more benefit and bring more people on board (‘evolution by stealth’).”
For some additional information, see:
A North American United Nations? by Rep. Ron Paul, of Texas on 8-30-06:
“According to the U.S. government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather , it is a 'dialogue' launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005. What is a 'dialogue'? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a 'dialogue' that many see as a plan for a North American union. According to the SPP website, this 'dialogue' will create new supra-national organizations to 'coordinate' border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA- and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade. . . ."
Bush Administration Erases U.S. Borders With Mexico and Canada, by Jerome Corsi, Human Events, 6-28-06 where it was reported:
“The Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), signed by President Bush with Mexico and Canada in Waco, Tex., on March 23, 2005, was fundamentally an agreement to erase our borders with Mexico and Canada.
As I have documented below, the SPP “working groups” organized within the U.S. Department of Transportation are signing trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements with Mexico and Canada designed to accomplish the open borders goal incrementally, below the radar of mainstream media attention, thereby avoiding public scrutiny. Congress is largely unaware that SPP exists, let alone knowledgeable about the extensive work being done behind the scenes by the executive branch to advance the agenda articulated by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) to establish a North American Union as a new regional super-government by 2010.
…The SPP working groups' organized within the U.S. Department of Transportation are signing trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements with Mexico and Canada designed to accomplish the open borders goal incrementally, below the radar of mainstream media attention, thereby avoiding public scrutiny. Congress is largely unaware that SPP exists.
… Also found in the June 2005 “Report to Leaders” is that the SPP working groups organized in DOC are reporting to three U.S. cabinet secretaries: Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Comparable cabinet-level working groups are referenced to government websites in Canada and in Mexico.
More than 20 working groups are identified in the June 2005 “Report to Leaders” and decisions have been made to open U.S. borders and skies to virtually unlimited “migration” and trade from Canada and Mexico.”
Government documents released by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal the Bush administration is running a 'shadow government' with Mexico and Canada in which the U.S. is crafting a broad range of policy in conjunction with its neighbors to the north and south….The documents clearly reveal the SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure."
North American Union Escapes Scrutiny, by Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch:
"Judicial Watch uncovered documents that shed new light on the 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,' announced by President Bush, former Mexico President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2005. The expressed goal of the partnership is to create 'a safer, more prosperous North America' through enhanced cooperation….Critics, however, charge that it is a veiled attempt to erase the borders between the countries, creating a 'North American Union' much like the European Union, with a common currency…”
The NAFTA Superhighway, by Representative Ron Paul of Texas:
“…The proposed highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization called the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” or SPP.
The SPP was first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco.
The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But don’t be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests.
The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution-- which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade.
The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union--complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.
North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA, by Jerome Corsi:
"In every area of activity, the SPP agenda stresses free and open movement of people, trade, and capital within the North American Union. Once the SPP agenda is implemented with appropriate departmental regulations, there will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations, capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas that the U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting with some appropriate North American Union regulatory body. At best, our border with Mexico will become a speed bump, largely erased, with little remaining to restrict the essentially free movement of people, trade, and capital."
“From an industry perspective, NASCO is one of the organizations supporting various north-south corridors identified to facilitate NAFTA trade. NASCO has absorbed the former North American International Trade Corridor Partnership, a non-profit group organized in Mexico with similar goals of internationalizing U.S. highways into a NAFTA structure to facilitate trade with Mexico and Canada. The North American Inland Port Network (NAIPN) is also listed as a NASCO partner. NAIPN functions as a NASCO sub-committee to develop “inland ports” along the highway corridors “to specifically alleviate congestion at maritime ports and our nation’s borders.”
…According to the 4,000-page draft environmental impact statement, the plan is to build a 4,000-mile network of new super-highways that will be “up to 1,200 feet wide (at full build-out) with separate lanes for passenger vehicles (three in each direction) and trucks (two in each direction), six rail lines (separate lines in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail, and freight rail), and a 200-foot wide utility corridor.”
Controversy Erupts Over NASCO and the NAFTA Super-Highway, by Jerome Corsi:
“On March 11, 2005, TxDOT signed a definitive agreement with Cintra Zachry, a limited partnership formed by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructures de Transport in Spain and the San Antonio-based Zachry Construction Co. “to develop the Oklahoma to Mexico/Gulf Coast element of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC-35). This agreement calls for the Cintra-Zachry limited partnership to pay Texas $1.2 billion “for the long-term right to build and operate the initial segment as a toll facility.” The initial TTC-35 segment is scheduled to be built roughly parallel to I-35 between Dallas and San Antonio. The final public hearings are scheduled in Texas for July and August. While construction contracts have yet to be finalized, Cintra-Zachry presumably holds those rights as a result of the $1.2 billion payment to Texas, as described in the March 11, 2005, contract. The timeline published on the Trans-Texas Corridor website envisions final federal approval by the summer of 2007, with the construction of the first TTC-35 segment to follow immediately afterward.
The plan to create a North American Union as a regional government in 2010 is directly stated only in the May 2005 task force report, “Building a North American Community.” Still, we must examine how the Security and Prosperity Partnership signed by President Bush with Mexico and Canada in Waco, Tex., on March 23, 2005, is being implemented. We find that government offices such as the Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups being organized within the U.S. Department of Commerce are signing trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements with Mexico and Canada consistent with the goal of fulfilling the CFR’s dream to bring about a North American Union by 2010.”
Point of View, Commentary by Kerby Anderson, 10-20-06:
The Texas segment (known as the Trans-Texas Corridor) will begin construction next year….In April 2006, TxDOT released a 4000-page Environmental Impact Statement that describes a corridor that will be 1200 feet wide (the size of four football fields). It will parallel Interstate 35, and be five lanes north and five lanes south (3 cars, 2 trucks). In the middle will be pipelines and rail lines. It will also have a 200-foot wide utility corridor. The corridor will start in Laredo, Texas, run past Austin to the Texas-Oklahoma border. However, the plans ultimately call for building some 4,000 miles of highway-railway-utility super-corridors throughout Texas over the next 50 years, using some 584,000 acres of what is now Texas farm and ranchland, at an estimated cost of $184 billion….This NAFTA superhighway will connect with ports in Mexico (specifically Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas) for NAFTA trade. The plan is to ship containers of cheap goods produced by under-market labor in China and the Far East into North America via Mexican ports. From the Mexican ports, Mexican truck drivers and railroad workers will transport the goods across the Mexican border with Texas. Once in the U.S., the routes will proceed north to Kansas City along the NAFTA Super-Highway, ready to be expanded by the Trans-Texas Corridor and NAFTA railroad routes being put in place by Kansas City Southern."
Jerome Corsi, Human Events, 6-26-06:
"What is NASCO? It is a non-profit 501(c)(6) organization that functions as a trade association and sometimes lobbying group for the public and private entities that are members. NASCO is an acronym for North America's SuperCorridor Coalition….According to the groups' website, NASCO is 'dedicated to developing the world's first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor.'….The city of Kansas City, Mo, and the Kansas City SmartPort are both listed on the NASCO website as NASCO members. The Kansas City Area Development Council has directly confirmed that the Kansas City SmartPort intends to build a Mexican customs facility to facilitate out-going traffic headed to Mexico….The Kansas City SmartPort brochure could not be more explicit: 'Kansas City offers the opportunity for sealed cargo containers to travel to Mexican port cities with virtually no border delays. It will streamline shipments from Asia.'"
Kansas City Star, 7-18-06:
"This spring, city officials signed off on a 50-year lease for the Mexican facility, with an option for 50 more years. . . . The council earlier this year earmarked $2.5 million in loans and $600,000 in direct aid to SmartPort, which would build and own the inland customs facility and sublet it to the Mexican government through agreements with U.S. Customs and Border Protection….The Mexican government would have no significant investment and would occupy the customs facility operation rent-free….SmartPort set up the deal to avoid imposing any expenses on Mexico above its ordinary border costs….SmartPort meanwhile is seeking a $1.5 million grant from the U.S. Economic Development Administration to purchase high-tech gamma-ray screening devices for drive-through inspections of truck cargo…..Confusion and secrecy have been hallmarks of the ambitious project. At the outset, Gutierrez and others have said the customs facility would be sovereign Mexican soil similar to a foreign embassy. This has changed."
Did the proposed new North American currency, the “Amero” make your paper? No? Read about it here: London stock trader urges move to 'amero' - Says many unaware of plan to replace dollar with N. American currency. With the continuing devaluation and looming collapse of the dollar it might be a done deal.
of the NAU and SPP, illegal immigration is a big problem now.
PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA
When contemplating the issue of illegal immigration and what to do about it, here is the transcript of a speech given by ex-Colorado Governor Dick Lamn at a population conference in Washington DC in 2004 to consider:
1. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon ---- all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.
2. I would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
3. We can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:
4. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated - I would add a second underclass, un-assimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.
5. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of Victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority - I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.
6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would "Celebrate diversity." "Diversity” is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other-that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse,” peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf ’s world history tells us:
7. Then I would place all these subjects off limits - make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to “heretic” in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like “racist”, “xenophobe” that halts argument and conversation. Having made america a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of “Victimology,” I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra - “that because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good.” I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.
8. Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book “Mexifornia.” This book is dangerous — it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please — if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed - please, please - don’t buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.
It sounds like Dick Lamn hit the nail on the head.
However, the question we need to be asking ourselves and members of Congress is:
Why is the plan to destroy America being implemented?
As detailed throughout the previous sections of this report, much of the problem of illegal aliens is a direct consequence of little to no border security. If nothing else, proper border security would prevent all the “previously deported” illegal aliens from simply returning and committing more of the collateral damage. Remember, some estimates put previously deported illegal aliens as being responsible for 60-65% of many of the crimes. Just eliminating that would be worth the expense.
If closing the borders and enforcing immigration laws are not important to you then I would suggest you go get the movies United 93, True Lies, and The Peacemaker from Blockbuster or NetFlix. In these movies Hollywood actually got it right, and is almost prophetic in True Lies. Then read Osama's exploits south of border -AlQaida in league with Mexican radicals in plot to penetrate U.S., says MI6 report and No place to run and consider some of the more serious consequences of open borders in a post 9/11 world.
If you still need some convincing, go back up to the TERRORISM, VIOLENT CRIMES, SEXUAL CRIMES, GANG CRIMES, and DISEASES sections and start clicking on the references and links. If you are a “bottom line” person go to the SUMMARY of COLLATERAL DAMAGE section and start adding up how much tolerating illegal immigration is costing you and your family.
As this paper has documented, the borders are very porous and any meaningful border security is basically non-existent across much of our borders making it a fairly simple process to break into the United States. Millions of peasants are doing it now. How tough do you think it is for trained terrorists?
In a speech by Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Michael Chertoff on September 11, 2006, Five Years Later, he stated “Our number one defense against terror involves the perimeter, keeping dangerous enemies from entering the United States of America.”
While DHS and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) are doing a better job, by that admission we are in big trouble.
How bad are we actually doing and what is the current risk? See The Five Years War: Public Safety versus Special Interest for some rather discouraging insight.
Currently, millions of illegal immigrants are simply strolling across the borders and into the United States. This paper has documented the massive collateral damage being inflicted on the American people and society by our “open border” policies and tolerance of this illegal activity.
The President and Congress take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Allowing illegal aliens to wantonly defy our borders and laws is an abrogation of responsibility.
Hopefully, it won’t take the NY or Washington DC subway system being contaminated with a nuclear or biological agent or Dallas, Phoenix, LA, NYC, or Washington DC going up in a mushroom cloud before our Government starts taking their responsibilities seriously and secures the border.
Maybe if the politicians who are responsible for securing the border and ensuring domestic tranquility thought Bin Laden planned on nuking Washington DC while Congress was in session, they might just start taking their responsibilities seriously.
If not and if it actually happens, we can re-elect politicians who finally will.
Regardless, border security starts with having secure borders where we can know and control who is coming into the United States.
As illustrated by the pictures above, there is little to no physical border security along much of the United States’ international borders. This has allowed illegal immigrants, including terrorists, to simply stroll across the border to gain access to the United States.
A significant improvement in the situation in part of San Diego area was made with the construction of the 14 mile San Diego dual fence, as shown below.
Contrast this border fence with the pictures of actual parts of the border in the paragraphs above.
What were the results of installing some serious physical border security in San Diego?
Upon completion of the “San Diego Primary Fence,” it quickly reduced apprehensions at the Imperial Beach Station by about 80% with similar reductions noted at the Chula Vista station. However, apprehensions at other nearby stations doubled as much of the illegal immigration simply went around the fence. It was only when additional enforcement measures,
manly manpower and detection support equipment, was added did traffic at those stations decline, although not as significantly as that achieved with better fences.
However, just like when you squeeze a water balloon in one place it bulges out in another, so the illegal alien traffic simply went other places, as noted in the following chart:
Pictures & graphs from CRS Report - Border Security: Barriers Along the US International Border
As proposed by We Need a Fence, and similar to the “three fence barrier” recommendations made by Sandia Laboratories in the CRS Report, maybe this is the kind of border security we need, although without the barbed wire roll on the southern side to be “politically correct”:
In any case, acoustic listening devices would need to be embedded in the road in all areas with infrastructure on the Mexican side of the fence to detect for tunneling under the fence.
Similar border security fences in Israel have reduced terrorist attacks by up to 95%. Applied uniformly on the southern border, they would reduce the border transgressions of the common illegal alien even more and catch a similarly high percentage of “the really bad” border crossers. For details on the proper way to have border security, see Israel’s Security Fence.
Why do we need such a formidable border fence? Because illegal alien criminals, gang members and potential terrorists are simply waltzing across the unmanned and/or lightly patrolled portions of the border. Furthermore, as this paper has detailed, and again as recently noted in Mecklenburg jailers find over 900 illegal immigrants since April, a high percentage of the ones that are deported simply come back in. 68 of 128 (53%) in this case, prompting Sgt. Daniel Stitt to comment, "We didn't realize it would be to this magnitude.”
Although NOBODY that I am aware of is studying it, but as some of the studies referenced in this report would seem to indicate, I would bet that the deported recidivist illegal alien criminals have a higher rate of returning than the average “only doing the work Americans won’t do” deported illegal alien. While I do not know what the record is, as referenced earlier in this report, one illegal alien criminal had been previously deported SEVENTEEN times. How much manpower and enforcement costs were expended on just that one illegal alien?
Part of the reason that deported illegal aliens return is because many that are deported are hard core criminals and, as the notorious bank robber Willy Sutton is reported to have once said, “That is where the money is.” Like a bad penny, many keep showing up again and again because nothing prevents it from happening.
As noted in the previous paragraphs, while the two fence, Sandia/SanDiego border fence dramatically reduced overall illegal crossings of the border where the fence was installed, it did not completely eliminate it. A notable portion of the more dedicated illegal aliens still made it across. What category do you suppose career criminals, gang members, and terrorists would be in? Remember, when an illegal alien criminal or sexual pervert makes it across the border and attacks you or your family it will be too late to build the fence. When terrorists smuggle a nuke across the border and vaporize your city it will be too late to FINALLY start building proper border security.
If we started today, proper physical border security along the 1,951 mile long US-Mexico border will take a few years to build, even if we only built the 850 or so currently identified “critical miles.” In the meantime, the illegal flow keeps gushing in. Once the decision to build the fence is made and publicized, a “last chance” stampede will start. To stop the existing flow and mitigate the surge before the fence is finished we must immediately and dramatically increase the physical presence of the INS on the border.
Since the vastly increased manpower requirement will only be temporary until the fence is built, this should be accomplished through the use of National Guard and/or military units with “shoot to kill” authorization when attacked. The latter might take changes in existing law but may need to be done to combat the foreign invasion. This action must be taken now. Each day we delay results in another few thousand illegal aliens entering the country, including gang members, hard core criminals, drug smugglers, sexual predators, and terrorists.
But you say, “I thought we started building a border fence!” Not so. Passing the Secure Fence Act to build much more fencing and funding the actual building of the complete fence are two different things. You know, a Congressional “show” that something is being done. For more information on that, see Vincent Gioia’s October 2006 commentary, The Mexican Border Fence Hoax.
As this paper has detailed, there are currently hundreds of thousands of criminal illegal aliens roaming the streets committing mayhem on US citizens. Many were previously deported, often multiple times, and they simply walked back in. Without such a formidable barrier the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is woefully undermanned to enforce border security. As noted in the aforementioned CRS report, a fence is a “force multiplier.”
If you are still not convinced that we need some serious physical border security, go back up to the CRIMINAL sections and start clicking on the links or go to the ICE Public Information News Releases and start perusing the press releases. Remember, until finally caught, the illegal alien criminals were in your city and neighborhood and the ones caught are only a small portion of the criminal illegal aliens still out there, with more pouring across each day.
In 2005 illegal alien criminals committed at least 1,172,036 crimes. The actual number may be three to five times as high. You can expect as many crimes in 2007. While some of the perpetrators were in the USA as a result of visa violations, at least 60% of those crimes are a direct result of no border security allowing previously deported illegal aliens to come right back in. When you or your family are crime victims it will be too late to build the fence.
It is also worth noting that a humane side affect of having robust border security barrier is that it will eliminate all the deaths from illegal aliens dying in the desert as they try to sneak across some rather inhospitable areas of the SW border. See: 460 border crossers died in past year. Posters on fence tell of 3,600 found dead in 11 years. That would make the fence “The Friendship Fence” as in friends don’t let illegal aliens sneak across the border and die in the desert.
The December 2006 report from the Congressional Research Service, Border Security: Barriers Along the US International Border, provides some costing for the fencing. The report notes that, excluding the costs of land acquisition, the Army Corp of Engineers estimates that the double layer Sandia type fence like what was installed in San Diego would cost about $1.3 million per mile. The CBO estimates the construction costs to be $3 million per mile.
The DHS constructed the 14 mile San Diego fence at a cost of $127 million but some serious mitigating circumstances (environmental assessments, legal appeals, lengthy delays, a big canyon, etc) over the last 4.5 miles heading to the Pacific soaked up $96 million of that meaning that the first 9.5 miles cost $3.3 million a mile.
Averaging out the four estimates of 1.3, 2.8, 3.0 and 3.3 million per mile we get $2.7 million per mile. Thus 850 critical miles would cost $2.3 billion and all 1,951 miles would cost $5.3 billion. Given that a much longer fence construction project would cost notably less on a per mile basis and the fact that much of the border is in flat, barren, desert wastelands, the total costs should actually be much lower.
If one assumes an average of two border patrol agents per mile, three shifts per day, with a 50% overhead for weekends, vacations, supervision, et cetera, to patrol all 1951 miles you would need a staff of 17,559. At an average burdened cost of $75,000 each that would be $1.3 billion per year. Maintenance and up-keep at $500,000 per mile would cost $976 million per year for a total operating cost of $2.3 billion per year. Since all 1,951 miles do not need such serious fencing and patrolling, a lower number of miles would be proportionally less. 850 miles, as an example, would only cost about $1 billion a year to man and maintain.
However, as the results from the San Diego fence proved, the illegal aliens will only go around any serious fencing meaning that all or most of the 1,951 miles will eventually need to be secured.
As detailed earlier in this report, in 1980 there were only 9,000 incarcerated illegal alien criminals in federal, state, and local facilities. In 2003 there were 267,000.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that there were no increases of illegal alien prisoners from 1980 through 1986, when Reagan’s “one time” amnesty bill was enacted, since it was supposed to stop the flow of illegal aliens into the US. Let us also assume that since 2003 there have been no more additional illegal alien prisoners, since we just ignore the problem anyway, and that there was a linear growth of the number of illegal aliens incarcerated from 1986 to through 2006. .
With all these “low ball” assumptions, that means we still have had 2,709,000 more man years of illegal alien incarceration, over and above the amount we would have had with only 9,000 incarcerated in 1986, when we weren’t supposed to have any more. At $25,000 per year incarceration costs that means we have already spent $67.7 BILLION more on incarceration than we otherwise would have had, if we had simply kept all the additional illegal alien criminals out - something Reagan’s amnesty deal , with border security and enforcement provisions, was supposed to have done. Unfortunately, our Government went gung-ho on the “amnesty” part and neglected the “security and enforcement” part of the “deal.”
Again, assuming no additional illegal alien prisoners, something that is highly unlikely, the total incarceration costs are going up by about $6.7 billion per year. That number alone is greater than the cost of building, operating and maintaining a fence today along the entire southern border.
So, as it turns out, not enforcing border security and building the fence in the first place was penny wise and pound foolish – something Congress seems to be very good at.
As this report has detailed, however, the yearly collateral costs of illegal immigration do not stop at the incarceration costs and in fact FAR EXCEEDS the cost of FINALLY building the fence and incorporating proper border security.
As a reminder, besides the $6.7B yearly incarceration costs the total yearly economic impact of illegal alien crime costs somewhere between $14.4 and $50 billion or more and may be as high as $437 billion; accidents caused by illegal aliens cost at least $11.5 billion and probably 3-5 times as much; and the education costs for illegal alien children is about $34.5 billion. Per year. Add in the costs for, welfare, social programs, medical costs, et cetera and you have another $100 billion or so. PER YEAR.
Still think the fence “costs too much?”
While a fence would not do anything for the 267,000 or so incarcerated illegal aliens that we currently have due to Presidential and Congressional malfeasance, it would allow that number to decline as they complete their sentences and are deported. It would also dramatically reduce the number of crimes currently being committed by illegal criminals as about 60% of the crimes committed by illegal aliens are committed by illegal aliens that were previously deported.
It would also dramatically reduce the illegal alien invasion.
The President and Congress are spending enormous amounts on the collateral damage of tolerating illegal aliens but they won’t spend the money to protect you from it happening in the first place.
We have spent hundreds of billions fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq, with a loss of about 3,000 American soldiers with many more being injured. Part of the reason for this is that we would rather be fighting terrorist THERE than HERE. Yet, at the same time, we are tolerating the invasion on the southern border which has resulted in far more Americans being injured and killed by illegal aliens HERE every year than the TOTAL casualties and injuries fighting the war on terror since 9/11, including the 2,752 Americans killed on 9/11.
Let me repeat: EVERY YEAR. Let that sink in for a moment.
Which gets the most press?
We send a carrier task force to the Persian Gulf in a futile attempt to persuade nut-case terrorist states to behave. Yet for the cost of one carrier we could build a fence along the entire southern border. For the yearly costs of just operating that carrier and its air wing, let alone the accompanying task force, we could man and maintain that fence.
How many Americans has Iran molested, raped, killed, and murdered versus how many Americans have foreign nationals who came across the southern border molested, raped, killed, and murdered?
What are our priorities?
So rather than demand Congress spend a paltry few billion dollars out of a three trillion dollar budget:
Exactly how many Americans are YOU willing to allow to be molested, raped, killed, and murdered to tolerate illegal immigration?
Since the fence is nothing more than a cost-benefit tradeoff:
What price do YOU put on each child molested?
What price do YOU put on each woman who is raped?
What price do YOU put on each American that is killed?
What price do YOU put on each American that is murdered?
What price do YOU put on a US city being vaporized?